Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics - Eubios Ethics ...

18 Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 22 (January 2012)
ones. Both Grand Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the
Islamic Republic, and Ayatollah Khamenei, the current
supreme leader, demonstrated their dominant authority
over the power of the elected President as well as the
national parliament and have intensified the sociopolitical
conflicts in Iran since the last presidential election in June
2009. Interestingly, the underlying causes of the current
sociopolitical situation in Iran may be found in the
philosophical and historical reasons for the division of the
Shi’a and Sunni traditions of Islam. First, Shi’a, contrary
to Sunni, believes that only Allah, the God, may choose
his vicegerent on Earth, and therefore no one else has a
choice in the matter. This belief is based on numerous
narrations in Shi’a Hadith which describe that the prophet
had “selected” his cousin Ali as his successor; however,
after the prophet passed away, Abu-Bakr was “wrongly
elected” as the first of the four Caliphates to rule over the
Muslims. Secondly, Abu-Bakr was only a political leader
and would not impose himself on people as the religious
intermediary with God. However, the Shi’a view is that Ali
should have continued to lead the Muslim nation
(“umma”) in both “religious and political” affairs, as the
Prophet did. This integration of religion and politics lies at
the heart of the political philosophy and the foundation of
the Islamic Republic of Iran. Such an interpretation of
Shi’a requires that both political and religious affairs be
controlled under the jurisdiction of God through the
“chosen” Imam. According to the philosophical
speculations and interpretations of the Shi’a scholars in
the Islamic Republic of Iran, “God would not leave people
without an Imam, and in his absence, a rightful successor
(the “Supreme Leader”)”. In this paper, the philosophical
framework for such an interpretation and its
repercussions on the institution of democracy and
peaceful government in contemporary Iran is discussed.
By analyzing the underlying ethical theory in Islam, based
on pluralistic prima facie ethical obligations, we may
realize how the political virtue of protecting the Islamic
State may overshadow all other ethical virtues in the
ensuing sociopolitical environment.
Introduction
Following the success of the revolution of the Iranian
people in overthrowing the royal Pahlavi dynasty, the
theocratic constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran was
approved in December 1979. With further revisions to the
constitution, soon the “Supreme Leader” became
responsible for the ultimate delineation as well as
supervision over the major policies of the nation, with full
power to assure that all bodies including the legislative
parliament, the judiciary system and the executive
government would follow the Shi’a Islamic rules and
principles. This concept is often referred to as “Velayate
Motlagh Faghih” meaning “absolute providence of the
jurist”. The Supreme Leader has the power to dismiss the
President if he wants to, and can also prevent from the
final approval of any law by the parliament through his
control over the so-called Guardian Council, a powerful
body of 12 members that decides whether parliament
approved bills may become law, and who is eligible to
run for president or the parliament; therefore, all “to be
elected” officials are effectively screened for their loyalty
to the “Supreme Leader”.
The current population (2012) of the Islamic Republic
of Iran is about 75 million 89% of which are Shi’a
Muslims, 9% are Sunni Muslims, and 2% are Zoroastrian,
Jewish, and Christian. The other minority is of Baha’is
with an estimated population of 300,000 in Iran whose
religion is not accepted as legitimate by the Iranian
constitution and therefore its followers may be
persecuted by law whenever discovered.
The Shi’a religion has an overwhelming influence over
all aspects of life in the Islamic Republic of Iran, including
law and ethics. The followers of Twelver Shi’a in Iran
consider themselves the “followers” of Ali, the first male
convert to Islam, who was the cousin and son-in-law to
the Islamic prophet Mohammad. Shi’a essentially means
“follower” in Arabic. Ali became the fourth Islamic
Caliphate (ruler) after the prophet passed away in the
year 632, and ruled over the Islamic nation from 656 to
661. However, Shi’a recognizes him as the first “Imam”
and his sons as the second and third Imams and then
their descendants as the remaining Imams. Shi’a is
based first on the teachings of the Quran, the holy book
of all Muslims, and second on the “messages” of the
prophet of Islam, Mohammad, as well as Ali and other
Imams, carried through Hadith. Shi’a favors Hadith
attributed to Mohammad and Imams, and credited to the
Prophet's family and close associates, in contrast to the
Sunni traditions which are largely narrated by the Prophet
Mohammad's companions, whom Sunnis consider as
trustworthy.
Shi’a, contrary to Sunni, believes that only Allah may
choose his vicegerent on Earth, and therefore no one
else should have a choice in the matter. They believe
that God's representatives including the Prophet as well
as Imams and their successors could not be elected by
common Muslims. Shi’a believes that there are numerous
narrations where the prophet selected Ali as his
successor. The Shi’a in Iran believes that Ali was the first
of the “Twelve Imams”, hence called Twelver Shi’a, who
were the rightful successors to Mohammad. The Twelfth
Imam did not die but became hidden only to rise again as
the “messiah” who will reestablish the Islamic rule after
chaos has taken over; in his absence, the rightful
successor is identified among religious clergies who can
make the legitimate decisions (“ijtihad”) based on Islamic
law “sharia”. The “Assembly of Experts” may thus identify
the “Supreme Leader” as the legitimate vicegerent of
God on Earth. Accordingly, Shi'a in Iran presents a
completely independent system of religious interpretation
and political authority in the Muslim world. According to
this view, during the occultation of the last Imam the
Supreme Leader should rule over the nation and only he
can rightfully interpret the Islamic law (Shariah) for
political guidance of the nation. Therefore almost all
religious, ethical, political and other decisions in the
Islamic Republic of Iran ultimately depend on the
interpretations of the Supreme Leader from Islam. The
decrees made by the Supreme Leader over religious as
well as political affair are considered as the legitimate
source for decision-making by all authorities in the
Islamic Republic of Iran.